An article on Follow The Media explores
the role of news agencies like Reuters and AP. Is the expense worth the membership?
The writer suggests that “good enough” is the new status quo.

Follow the Media writes:

“CNN dumped AP services at the end of June saying it could do better putting that money to work increasing its own news gathering sources. It had done the same with Reuters back in 2007 but the two now have resumed some relationship under an Agreement that Reuters will supplement CNN on breaking news. . . .

“But when it came to textual breaking news CNN never really got rid of Reuters. Many times afterwards on a breaking news story anchors would quote reuters.com as the source. No doubt editors at cnn.com are continuously monitoring news sites that pour out AP and other agency breaking news, often with very little if any delay after paying customers get the information. Look at cnn.com and just about every news item is “By the CNN Wire Staff” which in the trade is usually another way of saying a rewrite of some other news source. It also runs feature material based on its own programming.”

The write suggests:

“With cheap news a needed commodity these days some smart entrepreneur should set up a big warehouse in Bangalore and stuff it with people monitoring the world’s Web news sites. They could easily produce “good enough” regional and international text news reports for most with access available online. No doubt the news agencies with actual feet on the ground will be the first with the news, but unless you’re dealing with the financial community, or perhaps a 24-hour news channel, being first is not as important as one might think. Cheap counts big-time these days which is why, for instance, in the US several newspapers within a various states have set up their own co-operative news gathering, even using one another’s own news, as a way to save money over AP fees.”